• Table of Contents
• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Methodology
• Service provision
• Service coordination
• Indigenous families and children
• Factors facilitating or hindering service provision and outcomes
• Sustainability
• Conclusion
• Appendix A: Stronger Families and Communities Strategy 2004–2009 model
• Appendix B: SFCS 2004–2009 National Evaluation Indigenous Themed Study Reference Group
• Appendix C: Themed study methodology
• Appendix D: Stronger Families in Australia tables
• Appendix E: Indigenous themed study focus group guide
• Appendix F: Indigenous themed study phone consultation and Indigenous-specific CfC interviews questionnaire
• Appendix G: Interview schedule for CfC fieldwork sites
• List of shortened forms
• Endnotes
• References
• List of tables

Indigenous families and children: coordination and provision of services
Stronger Families and Communities Strategy 2004–2009

• Previous: Factors facilitating or hindering service provision and outcomes
• Next: Conclusion

7. Sustainability

Most respondents were extremely positive about SFCS 2004–2009, but they did not believe the level of service provided (at the time the interviews took place) could be sustained without continued funding. There was a conscious effort to increase the sustainability of services by increasing the likelihood of long-term quality staff; and some respondents believed that some partnerships and service coordination would continue. However, participants were emphatic that unless funding continued, both for employing staff and for delivering services, SFCS 2004–2009 programs were not sustainable in Indigenous communities. Administrative and management support was also considered vital to further ongoing development and strengthening of services.

Most maintained that many of the preliminary positive program outcomes would diminish if SFCS 2004–2009 programs did not receive ongoing funding, and that many of the potential benefits would remain unrealised without sustained, long-term interventions. It was felt that short-term interventions, which do not include sustained follow-up, could have a more detrimental effect on local Indigenous communities, than no intervention at all:

Once you take services away, what’s going to happen? It’s like giving someone a lolly and taking it away. [Interventions] need to be sustained ... [for] a generation at least. That’s the only way that you’re going to get general change ... To start something without finishing it is setting people up for failure.

Several participants argued that consistency and sustainability was more important for Indigenous service users than for others, given the history of short-term or incomplete programs that had characterised many Indigenous policies. The cycle of aborted programs and ‘unfinished promises’ had damaged the sustainability of successive initiatives, including SFCS 2004–2009, and fuelled resentment and mistrust.

Many respondents believed that future, long-term funding for early childhood services in Indigenous communities was essential if Indigenous outcomes were going to improve. Programs like CfC, with its four-year funding cycle, are not sufficient to result in long-term positive outcomes for young children and their families in disadvantaged Indigenous communities:

An opportunity has been given, an avenue presented [by CfC], but people need long-term, consistent support. It’s not straightforward [whether or not the outcomes for service users are sustainable]. We are competing against generations of broken family structure, drug abuse and addiction ... If [CfC programs] were to be successful, [they] would need longer-term, sustained funding.

The source of future funding for many Indigenous communities would need to be government-based, since many of these communities are located in remote areas with limited corporations to offer finance through social responsibility funding streams. Even in communities where a number of large corporations are operating, attracting funding to community development and early intervention programs is difficult because measuring outcomes is problematic.

Summary

• Services attempted to increase the sustainability of programs by seeking to attract, train and retain quality staff.
• In some cases, partnerships, service coordination and a focus on early childhood may be long-term outcomes of the SFCS 2004–2009 initiative.
• Unless funding continues for employing staff members and delivering services, SFCS 2004–2009 programs are not sustainable in Indigenous communities.
• Preliminary positive program outcomes will diminish if SFCS 2004–2009 programs do not receive ongoing funding, and potential benefits will remain unrealised without sustained, long-term interventions.
• Short-term interventions that do not include sustained follow-up could have a more detrimental effect on local Indigenous communities than no intervention at all, as they can fuel resentment and mistrust.
• Future, long-term funding for early childhood services in Indigenous communities is essential if Indigenous outcomes are to improve.
• CfC, with its four-year funding cycle, is not sufficient to result in long-term positive outcomes for young children and their families in disadvantaged Indigenous communities.
• Government funding is needed; corporate funding is difficult to attract for community development projects because there are usually limited or no corporate options in remote areas and it is difficult to measure outcomes.

• Previous: Factors facilitating or hindering service provision and outcomes
• Next: Conclusion

[ top ]